The Daily Mail is reporting that new NPD research has found that consumers want more access to online video services like HBO Go rather than "smart" features like social networking access on their TVs. The research comes a day after it was reported that Intel was planning to launch a TV service and set top box in 2013 that focused on content.

NPD said that a big problem is that TV owners are confused because too much choice is creating a complex user experience.

Quote:

'To counter this, OEMs and retailers need to focus less on new innovation in this space and more on simplification of the user experience and messaging if they want to drive additional, and new, behaviors on the TV."

Luke Peters, Editor of T3 Magazine, told MailOnline that Smart TVs will only become mainstream when they're as easy to use as changing a channel. Peters also notes that most Smart TV user interfaces are too complex for most people and that the content isn't good enough and that social networking doesn't make a lot of sense on TVs.

Apple has long been rumored to be interested in creating a TV that focuses on content as well in addition to features that could change human-to-TV interaction with Siri, Facetime and motion control. Apple was also rumored to be in talks with cable services like Comcast and Time Warner Cable in mid-2012, although no content deals have materialized yet.

Apple, like Intel, has largely had problems negotiating with content providers because of contractual limitations with cable providers, which may be why Apple's TV offering hasn't appeared yet. Although Intel's offering is set to debut January 7 at CES there's no telling if or when Apple's may debut, although recently it's been rumored that Foxconn is currently testing television set designs in the 50 - 55 inch range.

The Daily Mail is reporting that new NPD research has found that consumers want more access to online video services like HBO Go rather than "smart" features like social networking access on their TVs.

They've got my vote for that. I'm simply fed up of seeing social networking features being poured on top of apps like marmalade.

__________________"Do not try and bend the iPhone. That's impossible. Instead only try and realize the truth: there is no iPhone. It is not the iPhone that bends. It is only yourself."

Eventually Apple will get content, release a device and have massive success and then really **** over the other providers when they are begging to get on board. I am honestly surprised they aren't already all over this with DVRs, commercial skipping and internet that is now fast enough to download high def video easily (aka as fast as when people were stealing songs with dialup)

Eventually Apple will get content, release a device and have massive success and then really **** over the other providers when they are begging to get on board. I am honestly surprised they aren't already all over this with DVRs, commercial skipping and internet that is now fast enough to download high def video easily (aka as fast as when people were stealing songs with dialup)

This will be a true test for Tim Cook and has the potential to make or break him. Jobs would be fiercely negotiating with the media companies while having a with us or against us mentality to get the absolute best deal available for Apple's interests. The industry heads respected and feared Jobs to where they saw the potential in working with Apple while at the same time realized that going against them could spell future disaster.

Seeing how Cook handles this and what, if any, deal he gets will be interesting. The whole NBC/Comcast thing makes the whole situation that much more complicated for anyone looking to enter the business and compete with cable. Comcast doesn't want to help anyone out that is attempting to compete with traditional cable television. Yet, any service without the vast amount of channels and programs in NBC/Universal's catalog will look lacking and subpar.

Eventually Apple will get content, release a device and have massive success and then really **** over the other providers when they are begging to get on board. I am honestly surprised they aren't already all over this with DVRs, commercial skipping and internet that is now fast enough to download high def video easily (aka as fast as when people were stealing songs with dialup)

then Google will release a free Smart TV OS that is suddenly much easier to use than its current Google TV OS......

I think the problem of TV is that 99.9999999% of content is complete crap, and most people just watch TV to turn their brain off and don't care about what is actually happening. People can watch celebrities arguing, people who can't sing sining, or people talking about politics for hours.

I don't think TV can be saved at all, or that there is a need for it in today's world. You can do everything on a computer that a TV could do, and much more, so why do you need a TV? Is it just for the big screen? Then why not just get a bigger computer monitor?

People who grew up with TV are of course addicted to it, but those who grew up with the internet are less reliant on TV. I think and hope that TV will at some point become extinct and replaced by what is already there on computers.

Very, very true. I don't need a web browser and a Facebook client on a TV because I have my laptop and iPad for that. I use my TV for watching blockbuster films. Netflix is great, but their content is pretty bad. Hope Apple can turn the tide here and offer great selections of content.

The TV model is a tough nut to crack because right now the networks have all the incentive and make too much money to allow a la carte pricing. They've been hesitant to do it for networks...let alone first run content or movies.

Consumers, for as much as they complain about high prices, would likely not consume nearly as much content if they had to pay for what they watch.

Any viable model is going to be expected to come in around what people already spend for their cable/satellite bill. Otherwise neither the networks or consumers will bite.

Apple seems like they are wanting to model Apple TV after their success in the music industry. But that was a completely different situation. That industry was caught completely unprepared for the digital age. They were desperate.

Some would say the 'ad sales' driven model isn't sustainable in an age where more and more people watch taped shows on a DVR. But the industry is still making a ton of money.

Unless Apple can get cost effective first run content and live sports, it's a non-starter. And by live sports, specifically big money makers like the NFL, college football and postseason games in major sports. Those are sacred cows the networks (and in the case of the NFL satellite providers)are going to pay dearly to maintain exclusive rights.

I think the problem of TV is that 99.9999999% of content is complete crap, and most people just watch TV to turn their brain off and don't care about what is actually happening. People can watch celebrities arguing, people who can't sing sining, or people talking about politics for hours.

I don't think TV can be saved at all, or that there is a need for it in today's world. You can do everything on a computer that a TV could do, and much more, so why do you need a TV? Is it just for the big screen? Then why not just get a bigger computer monitor?

You can do everything on a computer that a TV could do, and much more, so why do you need a TV?

Everybody can use the basic functions of their TVs. TV sets are also very low maintenance (no updates, no viruses, no password, no driver issues, etc...) and have no boot time.
Most modern TVs also have a lot more AV I/O ports than PCs. You'll need them if you have an Apple TV, a couple of consoles and a sound system plugged in.

Quote:

Is it just for the big screen? Then why not just get a bigger computer monitor?

For one, I haven't seen a lot of 50"+ consumer monitors around. Apple's biggest displays are 27" now, and other manufacturers are about the same. Where are the "bigger computer monitors"?

Everybody can use the basic functions of their TVs. TV sets are also very low maintenance (no updates, no viruses, no password, no driver issues, etc...) and have no boot time.
Most modern TVs also have a lot more AV I/O ports than PCs. You'll need them if you have an Apple TV, a couple of consoles and a sound system plugged in.

For one, I haven't seen a lot of 50"+ consumer monitors around. Apple's biggest displays are 27" now, and other manufacturers are about the same. Where are the "bigger computer monitors"?

Yes, but perhaps the new Apple TV (or Samsung or whoever) will be just that: a huge but lower pixel multi-purpose screen that can be used for gaming, Apple TV, computer stuff, and "TV".

I think the problem with television is the entire concept of television itself, as it is now and as it ever was. Maybe TV could be to the new Apple TV a tiny bit like what the telephone is to the iPhone: one decreasingly important feature among a gazillion other more versatile features.

I think the problem of TV is that 99.9999999% of content is complete crap, and most people just watch TV to turn their brain off and don't care about what is actually happening. People can watch celebrities arguing, people who can't sing sining, or people talking about politics for hours.

I don't think TV can be saved at all, or that there is a need for it in today's world. You can do everything on a computer that a TV could do, and much more, so why do you need a TV? Is it just for the big screen? Then why not just get a bigger computer monitor?

People who grew up with TV are of course addicted to it, but those who grew up with the internet are less reliant on TV. I think and hope that TV will at some point become extinct and replaced by what is already there on computers.

As Daft Punk says, "Television rules the nation"…

SO true! I concluded over 2 years ago that the internet will one day replace TV as a medium. Books and newspapers are still around because they don't need electricity to use, radio is still around because it's crazy cheap and you can access it while you're driving your car, but the internet does almost everything TV does and does many of them better.

The only thing TV does better than the internet is provide content to huge audiences at once. During election night, news websites around the country were saturated with users and slow-loading pages due to the bandwidth demands, while the television continued to broadcast without difficulty.

All the same, thanks a lot for bringing this issue to light: more people need to realize how terrible TV and all its "content" really is.

They've got my vote for that. I'm simply fed up of seeing social networking features being poured on top of apps like marmalade.

So true. Let's hope 2013 is the year of moderation when it comes to the proliferation of social media.

Quote:

Originally Posted by baryon

I think the problem of TV is that 99.9999999% of content is complete crap, and most people just watch TV to turn their brain off and don't care about what is actually happening. People can watch celebrities arguing, people who can't sing sining, or people talking about politics for hours.

I don't think TV can be saved at all, or that there is a need for it in today's world. You can do everything on a computer that a TV could do, and much more, so why do you need a TV? Is it just for the big screen? Then why not just get a bigger computer monitor?

People who grew up with TV are of course addicted to it, but those who grew up with the internet are less reliant on TV. I think and hope that TV will at some point become extinct and replaced by what is already there on computers.

As Daft Punk says, "Television rules the nation"…

Yeah, but TV won't go out without a fight. Too many TV addicted people, too much money to be made and a lot of people in the business who don't want the money train to stop. Maybe it will take another 5 years before we get any serious changes that benefit the consumer and are in sync with the times.

I think the problem of TV is that 99.9999999% of content is complete crap, and most people just watch TV to turn their brain off and don't care about what is actually happening. People can watch celebrities arguing, people who can't sing sining, or people talking about politics for hours.

I don't think TV can be saved at all, or that there is a need for it in today's world. You can do everything on a computer that a TV could do, and much more, so why do you need a TV? Is it just for the big screen? Then why not just get a bigger computer monitor?

People who grew up with TV are of course addicted to it, but those who grew up with the internet are less reliant on TV. I think and hope that TV will at some point become extinct and replaced by what is already there on computers.

As Daft Punk says, "Television rules the nation"…

Spot on,

I think the problem is that people are used to sit in front of the television and watch whatever crap is there just to spend time. It's hard to come up with decent content 24/7 the whole fricking year. That's why there's so much crap.

The only thing TV does better than the internet is provide content to huge audiences at once. During election night, news websites around the country were saturated with users and slow-loading pages due to the bandwidth demands, while the television continued to broadcast without difficulty.

That's because they have a poor network engineering team. Content distribution is really not that hard to do on a massive scale.

Hopefully content providers will hire smart people like myself who can setup and maintain these solutions.

I think the problem of TV is that 99.9999999% of content is complete crap, and most people just watch TV to turn their brain off and don't care about what is actually happening. People can watch celebrities arguing, people who can't sing sining, or people talking about politics for hours.

To me that's rather telling of how you watch TV.

I love TV, but I only watch original content made on BBC, or a Channel 4 comedy, plus the annual Idiot Abroad on Sky One. Most of the time my TV is used for gaming or watching blurays, and rarely as an extension of my computer.

Quote:

I don't think TV can be saved at all, or that there is a need for it in today's world. You can do everything on a computer that a TV could do, and much more, so why do you need a TV? Is it just for the big screen? Then why not just get a bigger computer monitor?

Price of a 27" monitor=price of a 55" TV.

I find that TV's (and the devices attached) are all about convenience. A computer must be booted up and have their media centre app launched (why did Apple remove theirs?). TV's are easy to sit back with content playing, remote control in hand. I can't do that with my iMac, even though it's 27" I have to go up to the computer, find my media, press play and then sit back.